Re: ts/*.c files

2006-02-15 Thread Gisle Vanem
Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tuesday 14 February 2006 11:26, Gisle Vanem wrote: Some of the new ts/ files are too long for a 8+3 filesystem. a ton of files are too long for 8+3 filesystem in the openssl tarball None of the *.[ch] files. They are all 8+3 unique AFAICS (and

Re: ts/*.c files

2006-02-15 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Wednesday 15 February 2006 06:04, Gisle Vanem wrote: Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tuesday 14 February 2006 11:26, Gisle Vanem wrote: Some of the new ts/ files are too long for a 8+3 filesystem. a ton of files are too long for 8+3 filesystem in the openssl tarball None

Re: ts/*.c files

2006-02-15 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
Gisle Vanem wrote: Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tuesday 14 February 2006 11:26, Gisle Vanem wrote: Some of the new ts/ files are too long for a 8+3 filesystem. a ton of files are too long for 8+3 filesystem in the openssl tarball None of the *.[ch] files. They are all 8+3

ts/*.c files

2006-02-14 Thread Gisle Vanem
Some of the new ts/ files are too long for a 8+3 filesystem. ts_req_print.c ts_req_utils.c ts_resp_print.c ts_resp_sign.c ts_resp_utils.c ts_resp_verify.c ts_verify_ctx.c I only ask if the ts_resp_*.c files could be renamed to ts_rsp_*.c. --gv

Re: ts/*.c files

2006-02-14 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Tuesday 14 February 2006 11:26, Gisle Vanem wrote: Some of the new ts/ files are too long for a 8+3 filesystem. a ton of files are too long for 8+3 filesystem in the openssl tarball -mike __ OpenSSL Project